masseffectfandomcom-20200222-history
User blog:Arbington/My thoughts on the central theme of the series.
In the wake of the ending fiasco, many discussions have come about as to the central theme of the Mass Effect series. In this blog, I endeavor to communicate my thoughts on this matter. Please comment below with your input, or your own ideas as to the central theme of the Mass Effect series. Many people have claimed that the central theme should be the purpose of the Reapers, and I agree. Most people have, however, noted the very obvious disconnection between inevitable syntho-organic war and any other non-metaphorical theme in the series. I have taken a deeper look at the meaning behind events and character in the series, and I think I've found a running theme in the series, that is also represented strongly in the ending. I believe that central theme to be the concept of "the end justifies the means" versus the concept of "the means are more important than the end." The End Justifies the Means This first concept is personified by a Renegade Shepard. Notice that just about every Renegade option works towards the same end as the equivalent Paragon option, but uses a more violent method. Pure Renegade Shep shoots an innocent hostage just to take out Tela Vasir, slaughtered countless innocents on Torfan, practically sterilizes the krogan just for a few fleets, directly goes against Tali's wishes to prevent her exile, kills the Virmire Survivor without hardly a thought to stop Udina, pushes a man out of a skyscraper just to keep him from sounding an alarm, kills Wrex on Virmire with even less of a thought than for the VS during the coup, and more. In fact, Renegade Shepard's philosophy of exitus acta probat leads the Alliance to choose the Commander to deal with Lord Darius, knowing full well that Shep will likely just shoot the place up. These are only a few examples of the brutal lengths Renegade Shepard will go to to accomplish their mission. This concept is also the driving doctrine of Cerberus, one of the series' major antagonists. It doesn't matter to the Illusive Man what you do as a Cerberus operative, but rather that you accomplish your task, resulting in the many despicable actions taken by these operatives. Human dominance is the goal, and nothing will stand in Cerberus' way of reaching that goal. Certainly not ethics or morality. Also, throughout Mass Effect 3, Cerberus stops at nothing to achieve their goal of Control. They try wiping out the seat of power in the galaxy, terrorizing civilians, stealing information critical to the galaxy's only hope, the Crucible, and they repeatedly try to kill the one person who can save everybody, Shepard. But, nothing is more important to them than reaching their goal. The Catalyst's Cycle of Extinction is also representative of this theme. Inevitable syntho-organic war is stopped, but at the terrible cost of wiping out civilization every 50,000 years, and harvesting organic life for meat-glue to make more Reapers. That's a terrible and abhorrent price to pay, but the end was achieved. At the end of the trilogy, When it comes time to make your final choice, Destroy represents this ideology. You defeat the Reapers, but at the cost of billions of synthetic lives, the means to rebuild efficiently, and a galactic cultural and economic hub. Still, you did defeat the Reapers. The Means are More Important than the End Paragon Shepard represents essentially all that is morally "just," and thus the concept that the means are more important than the end. Paragon Sheps take a diplomatic approach whenever possible, minimize loss of life, deal respectfully with their squad, and eschew genocide. Pure Paragon Shepards save the rachni despite their past, avoid killing the colonists on Feros despite their hostility, let the murderous terrorist Balak escape to save hostages, later talk Balak down despite him having a gun pointed to their head rather than killing him, save the krogan race despite the loss of salarian support, disregard the risk to their life to talk Wrex down and save his, and, just like the case with Renegade Shepard, these are only a few examples. The Council represent this ideology as well. They hardly ever get anything productive done, but they follow procedure and never abuse their power, staying within their political limits. They maintain order throughout the galaxy. They take a morally just position, even though it seldom produces good results. Interestingly enough, two endings fall under this ideology, giving it a stronger representation in the ending than its opposite. This, however, is in line with the noticeable trend towards the Paragon in the third game. Evidence of this trend can be seen in the level of Paragon-like emotion expressed by Shepard after the nightmare sequences. You're kind of forced into them, even if they are out of character for your Shepard. The ending that represents the "the means are more important that the end" ideology is Control. The Cycle of Extinction is still stopped in this ending, but the Reapers still exist. Control minimizes casualties, however, exchanging total solvency of the Reaper problem for the saving of lives. Since it saves lives, the means of Control is a morally justified solution to the problem of the Cycle. Conclusion In the end, I think there is enough evidence to prove that this ideological conflict is the central theme of the series. At the very least, it's definitely a central theme of the series. The biggest hole I can identify in this theory is the issue of Synthesis. Under which ideology does it fall, if indeed it falls under either of them? What do you think? Is all of what I just said a load of bologna? Is there a better interpretation of Mass Effect's central theme? Comment below! Category:Blog posts Category:Blog posts